Tiring of "Profession Parity..." threads?... My thoughts...

I am just wondering how many of the posters here are getting tired of the "profession parity" threads that are being sown here?
I am under the impression that Elite (all of its incarnations) have been about the prestige and status of your ranks in the three main fields, Combat, Trade and Exploration.
If I am a trading towards Elite status then I will obviously become rich just as I would in real life.
If I am a combateer then my skill at combat and ability to have taken down many, many foes will determine my Combat status. A real life comparison could be any "Topgun" or "Red Baron" from RL combat situations, these people were not poor but neither were they as rich as Alan Sugar or Richard Branson (my poor example of traders).
Explorers explore and gain their status from their expeditions, Ranulf Fiennes is not poor but neither is he a billionaire.

There SHOULD be a wealth disparity for the different professions just as there is in real life (doctors vs financial vs lawyers vs chief execs as examples) the VALUE of a profession is more than just the monetary gain.

The problem as I see it is that there are no restrictions for being able to obtain the larger more expensive ships other than the prohibitive costs involved.
Maybe a voucher system for combat skill or a discount based on PvE and PvP successes would be able to make the ships "easier" to obtain, other than having to grind through trading to afford them.
Also, maybe a license system could be incorporated so that those of us that have been trading our buttocks off have to "pass" a test to be able to buy the larger scarier ships. Just my thoughts and I am coming up with these as I type.

My experience is that unless you have a certain amount of skill piloting, the larger more expensive ships are not as easy to use and maintain as it was to spend the time to "grind" your way to them.

As a side note, some of my most fun times have been in an Eagle and some of the most frustrating have been in my Python.

What do you think guys and gals?
 
I am just wondering how many of the posters here are getting tired of the "profession parity" threads that are being sown here?
I am under the impression that Elite (all of its incarnations) have been about the prestige and status of your ranks in the three main fields, Combat, Trade and Exploration.
If I am a trading towards Elite status then I will obviously become rich just as I would in real life.
If I am a combateer then my skill at combat and ability to have taken down many, many foes will determine my Combat status. A real life comparison could be any "Topgun" or "Red Baron" from RL combat situations, these people were not poor but neither were they as rich as Alan Sugar or Richard Branson (my poor example of traders).
Explorers explore and gain their status from their expeditions, Ranulf Fiennes is not poor but neither is he a billionaire.

There SHOULD be a wealth disparity for the different professions just as there is in real life (doctors vs financial vs lawyers vs chief execs as examples) the VALUE of a profession is more than just the monetary gain.

The problem as I see it is that there are no restrictions for being able to obtain the larger more expensive ships other than the prohibitive costs involved.
Maybe a voucher system for combat skill or a discount based on PvE and PvP successes would be able to make the ships "easier" to obtain, other than having to grind through trading to afford them.
Also, maybe a license system could be incorporated so that those of us that have been trading our buttocks off have to "pass" a test to be able to buy the larger scarier ships. Just my thoughts and I am coming up with these as I type.

My experience is that unless you have a certain amount of skill piloting, the larger more expensive ships are not as easy to use and maintain as it was to spend the time to "grind" your way to them.

As a side note, some of my most fun times have been in an Eagle and some of the most frustrating have been in my Python.

What do you think guys and gals?

I agree with some of your alternative ideas, but after today's dev update, I think we all have to step back, wait and see, then reevaluate.
 
I am just wondering how many of the posters here are getting tired of the "profession parity" threads that are being sown here?
I am under the impression that Elite (all of its incarnations) have been about the prestige and status of your ranks in the three main fields, Combat, Trade and Exploration.
If I am a trading towards Elite status then I will obviously become rich just as I would in real life.
If I am a combateer then my skill at combat and ability to have taken down many, many foes will determine my Combat status. A real life comparison could be any "Topgun" or "Red Baron" from RL combat situations, these people were not poor but neither were they as rich as Alan Sugar or Richard Branson (my poor example of traders).
Explorers explore and gain their status from their expeditions, Ranulf Fiennes is not poor but neither is he a billionaire.

There SHOULD be a wealth disparity for the different professions just as there is in real life (doctors vs financial vs lawyers vs chief execs as examples) the VALUE of a profession is more than just the monetary gain.

The problem as I see it is that there are no restrictions for being able to obtain the larger more expensive ships other than the prohibitive costs involved.
Maybe a voucher system for combat skill or a discount based on PvE and PvP successes would be able to make the ships "easier" to obtain, other than having to grind through trading to afford them.
Also, maybe a license system could be incorporated so that those of us that have been trading our buttocks off have to "pass" a test to be able to buy the larger scarier ships. Just my thoughts and I am coming up with these as I type.

My experience is that unless you have a certain amount of skill piloting, the larger more expensive ships are not as easy to use and maintain as it was to spend the time to "grind" your way to them.

As a side note, some of my most fun times have been in an Eagle and some of the most frustrating have been in my Python.

What do you think guys and gals?

You couldn't have picked a worse time to create this thread :)
The Developers recognize that trading is OP and said so in the most recent Dev update (11). They are working to balance the professions in upcoming releases.
The reason there were a lot of posts about it was that it was an issue. FD recognize that (or probably already knew about it).
Many people defending that trading should be the most profitable were either defending the role because it was their chosen role and they wanted to defend their advantage or they are the type of people that just defend against any player suggested changes to the game (and quickly U-turn as soon as the Devs agree with the changes).
 
Personally I do think that Trading SHOULD be the most profitable of the three main income methods, but not by the huge amount it currently is. Trading is easily the most boring and mind numbing of the three schools, so I have no problem with it being 30-50% more profitable than combat & exploration. I mean, there wouldn't be anyone doing it if there wasn't 'some' advantage to it.

I'm a combat pilot first and foremost, but I've spent the best part of a month in a T7 in order to save for my beloved Vulture. I've now sold my T7 and am enjoying the newly improved RES sites. I'm glad I spent that time trade grinding, because now I can enjoy the game again, in a ship that I absolutely love.

Exploration needs its income buffed by 100-120% and combat by 80-100%. If they did that, those professions would be much more enticing in terms of money making, whilst trading would still be the main attraction for those seeking to make as much money as possible.
 
Personally I do think that Trading SHOULD be the most profitable of the three main income methods, but not by the huge amount it currently is. Trading is easily the most boring and mind numbing of the three schools, so I have no problem with it being 30-50% more profitable than combat & exploration. I mean, there wouldn't be anyone doing it if there wasn't 'some' advantage to it.

I'm a combat pilot first and foremost, but I've spent the best part of a month in a T7 in order to save for my beloved Vulture. I've now sold my T7 and am enjoying the newly improved RES sites. I'm glad I spent that time trade grinding, because now I can enjoy the game again, in a ship that I absolutely love.

Exploration needs its income buffed by 100-120% and combat by 80-100%. If they did that, those professions would be much more enticing in terms of money making, whilst trading would still be the main attraction for those seeking to make as much money as possible.

Trading being boring is the worst reason that it should earn more money than other professions.
The issue there is that trading is boring.
That needs addressing so it is not boring.
Once it's not boring and all professions are balanced then we're addressing the problems correctly.
We need to address the issues, not use the issues to support other issues.
 
The point about there being other measures of progression besides credits is a good one, though. Trying to balance game progression as well as the galactic economy with one single resource might not be the best way to do it. As the OP mentioned the Red Baron wasn't incredibly rich, but he had the best fighter plane available at the time (arguably, but that's not the point here). Mr Branson may be rich, but I don't think he can own a fully kitted F-22.
 
Trading being boring is the worst reason that it should earn more money than other professions.
The issue there is that trading is boring.
That needs addressing so it is not boring.
Once it's not boring and all professions are balanced then we're addressing the problems correctly.
We need to address the issues, not use the issues to support other issues.

There's no way you can make trading fun. It's one of those things that you either enjoy or you don't... it's the profession equivalent of marmite.
 
There's no way you can make trading fun. It's one of those things that you either enjoy or you don't... it's the profession equivalent of marmite.

I don't agree with this, more depth will make any of the roles, mining, trading, fighting, more fun.

For trading, it's boring because there's no real thought to it. Find a route by looking for high population extraction/hightech then trade until the profit goes.

Add some depth and thought and challenge and it becomes fun.

The real thing that makes trading need balancing is that it's currently the most profitable whilst being the easiest and most risk free. Solve that not by reducing profit, but by increasing the depth and challenge and adding some fun in the process.
 
The point about there being other measures of progression besides credits is a good one, though. Trying to balance game progression as well as the galactic economy with one single resource might not be the best way to do it. As the OP mentioned the Red Baron wasn't incredibly rich, but he had the best fighter plane available at the time (arguably, but that's not the point here). Mr Branson may be rich, but I don't think he can own a fully kitted F-22.

What if combat and multi role ships were cheaper the higher your combat rating? Traders have to pay full price for ships with their precious money but combat fighters/ pirates don't have to.
 
Last edited:
The real thing that makes trading need balancing is that it's currently the most profitable whilst being the easiest and most risk free.

I do not agree, I came across an insane NPC the other day and lost 6mil in one go, it was a risk I am happy to take and must accept. Risk free, trading is not.
 
What if combat and multi role ships were cheaper the higher your combat rating? Traders have to pay full price for ships with their precious money but combat fighters/ pirates don't have to.

Right, and governments could subsidize the cost of exploration equipment for players with a proven record of finding new astronomical bodies on 1 condition: data must not be sold to other rival states
 
What if combat and multi role ships were cheaper the higher your combat rating? Traders have to pay full price for ships with their precious money but combat fighters/ pirates don't have to.

Pretty sure I said that in my post at the start. Thanks for agreeing.
 
I don't agree with this, more depth will make any of the roles, mining, trading, fighting, more fun.

For trading, it's boring because there's no real thought to it. Find a route by looking for high population extraction/hightech then trade until the profit goes.

Add some depth and thought and challenge and it becomes fun.

The real thing that makes trading need balancing is that it's currently the most profitable whilst being the easiest and most risk free. Solve that not by reducing profit, but by increasing the depth and challenge and adding some fun in the process.

Nope... that would just make it more enjoyable for the people who enjoy it already. People who currently hate trading will NOT enjoy it more if it's made more complex & challenging... I'd guess the opposite.
 
As long as money is the only progression people will rightfully complain about income inequality here.

Military carreers with appropriate mission designs, free fighter ships and your own NPC wingmen as you rank up might be one way out. Gotta collect all those medals!
 
Last edited:
I do not agree, I came across an insane NPC the other day and lost 6mil in one go, it was a risk I am happy to take and must accept. Risk free, trading is not.

Yes, this. What's with all the 'risk free' trading? It is combat pilots who are risk free. First off, they are armed, so they can fight. And if they lose, insurance is very little, and no cargo to worry about. Talk about risk free.
 
Yes, this. What's with all the 'risk free' trading? It is combat pilots who are risk free. First off, they are armed, so they can fight. And if they lose, insurance is very little, and no cargo to worry about. Talk about risk free.

It probably comes from many traders openly admitting to going solo, watching Netflix, and playing with a laptop trackpad because they don't feel the need for a flight stick... All things I've seen in recent days.
 
Yes, this. What's with all the 'risk free' trading? It is combat pilots who are risk free. First off, they are armed, so they can fight. And if they lose, insurance is very little, and no cargo to worry about. Talk about risk free.

Yea I mean going toe to toe with giant ships is way less risky than just jumping away from them.

Bounty Hunters go looking for trouble, traders avoid it. Combat is the rule for hunters, combat is the exception for traders.
 
Last edited:
Yea I mean going toe to toe with giant ships is was less risky than just jumping away from them.

I am unsure how to take your comment, but if it about combat being risky then "yes", it is, but unless you are using a 100mil+ ship you will not lose 5-10mil in one go. Unlike us T9 traders. All I am saying is that trading is not the risk free profession it is being touted as, and as for jumping away, it is not always possible (especially when you freak out and panic).
 
Back
Top Bottom